The San Joaquin River Project is a long term effort to restore flows to the San Joaquin River so the salmon can live in. The article I decide to agree with was the, “River Plan Too Fishy for my Taste Buds”, which was written by Bill McEwen because of the reasons why McEwen is a believable experience as a 35 year as a newspaper writer. His boss Jim Boren says,”the community is much better because of McEwen writing. This article was published in Fresno which is a city surrounded by farmers and they don’t worry about the fish only there jobs. I agree with Bill McEwen that the River Project is bad because there is no point of restoring the river so the salmon can live in due to the fact the salmon would die instantly of the temperature in the…show more content… I agree with the River Plan Too Fishy for my Taste Buds article by Bill McEwen because the is there is no point restoring a river for the salmon knowing there are going to die due to the temperature in the river. Ethos is using credibility and character to persuade. “ According to the experts at UC Davis studying California’s rapidly declining salmon populations; the fish “ are exceptionally vulnerable to climate change. This Ethos quote was in found in the article River Plan Too Fishy for my Taste Buds by Bill McEwen. The example sentence I picked is an ethos argument by seeing how the sentence shows a Famous college with experience in many things. I agree with the Ethos argument because the famous college UC Davis talks about how the salmon are vulnerable to the climate change which means that restoring the river is pointless. Logos is using statistics and logic to persuade others. “ No one even knows whether salmon can even survive in the lower San Joaquin, which has temperatures more suitable for bass and bluegill. The example sentence…show more content… My example sentence is logos by seeing the that salmon are not suitable for the temperatures in the river and bass and bluegill are. I agree with this logos argument because if you know salmon can’t live in the temperatures in the river because they will die instantly why attempt to restoring something impossible. Pathos is using emotions to persuade others. “ The reality is, our federal and state governments will spend hundreds of millions - if not billions- of dollars in coming years on program that will yield a salmon exhibit instead of a sustainable fishery. The example sentence I picked is pathos by how Bill McEwen uses a lot of emotions on that sentence. My position is superior to the opposing position because restoring a river for salmon to come through knowing they will die is a waste of money for little no results. The quotation I’m using is this “ But the wonder of the river’s restoration won’t be in the biology involved, which is well established”. I disagree with this quotation because the author says that no biology used in restoring the river which is a big mistake due to the fact that there might be something wrong if biology isn’t uses